User:Historiographer/archive4

Edit warring again
You're edit waring on South Korea now. You already have a long block history; please use talkpages and other appropriate means for discussion. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 16:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your concern, but I did not edit war. If I did, you should give a warning to my opponent, but you did not. I explained my edit to him anyway.--Historiographer (talk) 00:23, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Han Dynasty edits
Hi Historiographer. I recently left this message at Talk:Han Dynasty in regards to your edits; I would appreciate it if you would respond there before taking any other action:-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 15:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Recently, User:Historiographer removed the WikiProject Korea banner from this article talk page and other Han Dynasty article talk pages. This choice was made because: "Han was just occupied northern part of Korean peninsula, not whole of Korea." That is true, but partial occupation of the Korean peninsula for centuries (with some interruptions, such as during Wang Mang's reign) should still be considered a significant historic event in Korea's history. Also, by extension of the same logic, the banners for WikiProject Central Asia and WikiProject Vietnam should be removed, because the Han Dynasty's dominion did not extend over the whole of Central Asia (only the easternmost portion) or the whole of Vietnam (only the northern portion). In fact, the Han Dynasty did not extend over the whole of what is now modern-day China! Should we then get rid of the banner for WikiProject China? No. Of course not. I have reverted Historiographer's edits for these reasons.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 14:53, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I understand your point. I will not revert to remove the template.--Historiographer (talk) 00:23, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:Grammar check
Hi, Historiographer. Thank you for dropping by, but I think I'm hardly a good candidate for proofreading your English writing since English is also not my first language. Moreover, I'm currently swamped with expanding the Gyeongju article which really needs immediate attentions and the subjects of the two articles seem to be far away from what I usually edit. However, the character of Seo Hui looks interesting, so I think I can help you later today or tomorrow if I can spare a time. If so, I would perhaps add or expand the article a little. As for the invasion article, I'm less interested in the subject, so I can not warrant for my help. As for the grammar part, you may need to ask grammar check to native English speakers. Anyway, this hot, stuffy, and sizzling summer is absorbing my whole energy, so well.. take care.-Caspian blue 20:42, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the promise on grammar checking at the articles for me. If I spare a time, I will help you out expand the article of Gyeongju.--Historiographer (talk) 23:27, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Seo Hui
Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible. --Alarichus (talk) 09:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)
The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:44, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

File:History of Korea-1374.png
I think the Yuan in this map of yours should be Northern Yuan instead. Yuan Dynasty ended before 1374. Also what happened in 1374 that makes you draw this map this way precisely for that year? At last, a suggestion: Please upload your maps to WikiCommons so that more people can use them in a wider range. KEIM (talk) 03:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, Yuan was replaced by the Ming in 1368. I will changed name of the that soon. My map is the fruit of myself's labor, and also it have reliable sources about the Historical maps of Korea. However, Some user distorted and recreated my maps. For example, they are slashing boundaries of the Gojoseon and Goguryeo in the year. I was annoyed at their rude behaviors. I am not allowed to do upload wider range. Sorry.--Historiographer (talk) 03:46, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What happened in 1391 that make the map look this way File:History of Korea-1391.png? What sources do you use? KEIM (talk) 16:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * According to the "Historical Atlas of Korea", Goryeo continue to expanded their lands.--Historiographer (talk) 07:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Help for old Gyeongju maps
Hi, Historiographer, since you seem to be good at creating/finding maps, I'm dropping by to ask you a favor. The official website of Kyujanggak provides a lot of useful scanned images of old Korean maps and documents, but I don't know how to download maps or document images in big size from the site. If you have a time, could you download any old map of Gyeongju during the Joseon Dynasty? I need to add images to Gyeongju section. As you look at ko:구미시 the featured article of Korean Wikipedia, it has old maps of Gumi city, so I want to apply the same format to Gyeongju article here. If you help me, I would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.--Caspian blue 11:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello
Hello, since you are interested in ancient warfare, i would like to ask you if you would like to contribute here Dacian warfare.Thankou.Megistias (talk) 19:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Um... I don't know about the Dacian warfare. I just interested in the ancient east asian warfare than ancient western warfare. Thank you.--Historiographer (talk) 14:21, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Titles of administrative divisions in Korea
Hi, your input would be appreciated at WT:KOREA. Thanks.--Caspian blue 14:11, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September! Many thanks,  Roger Davies  talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)
The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:02, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Joseon diplomacy
In light of your several recent edits, please see Talk:Joseon Tongsinsa. Your edit summary comments about North Korea would seem to be based on assumptions which are without any substantial foundation. In light of your comments at WP:WikiProject Korea plus the edit summary statements, it is difficult to construe this series of moves as transparently unsuitable for brief discussion.

A somewhat less urgent matter is the subject of Talk:Joseon Tongsinsa. --Tenmei (talk) 22:08, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September! For the coordinators,  Roger Davies  talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)
The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Korean Empire

 * Sir, this isn't really polite to give a proof link in Korean (this is English Wikipedia so, please, provide an English link), stating than you know Korean history better than me. So, please, proceed to the talk page and we shall discuss the article. 95.25.227.106 (talk) 14:18, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, This is Korean article, which is provided by me. However, It have a significant implication, such as I think that it is not necessarily always, although an English wikipedia.--Historiographer (talk) 13:58, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Probably you should read WP:NONENG. 95.25.242.93 (talk) 18:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I understand your devote to your nation. But please don't write your history from the victor's side. Today your country is one of developed countries in Asia while Mongolia is emerging market. But it doesn't mean ignore others. I hope you have intelligence to understand it. Thank you.--Enerelt (talk) 00:55, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't ignore others including you before your personal attack to me at first. I also hope you should have historical tolerant in your nation, not based on ethnocentric. Thank you.--Historiographer (talk) 14:37, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Historiographer -- I have a neutral suggestion. I wonder about the use of the wiki-term "personal attack" in this very small circumstance. Is it possible that some other term would serve?  Before posting this  modest comment, I reviewed the Wiktionary definition of the word attack. --Tenmei (talk) 16:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Tenmei, Your words has a quite dig at me.--Historiographer (talk) 13:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Historiographer -- In this context, I can only invite your consideration of a mild suggestion.  I ask only, "Is it possible that some other term would serve?"  This is not intended as a "dig" nor a criticism nor a complaint -- only a modest question which remains open-ended. --Tenmei (talk) 17:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you my friend for your consideration. I like it.--Enerelt (talk) 09:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I think you can't see the difference between Vassal and autonomous area. It's so pitty that you ignoring other without criticizing yourself. Please don't mad at me.
 * What are you talking about? You are continually assert, which is based on your point of view, not considered about the fact. Your behaviors are just reaction against me with hostility.--Historiographer (talk) 12:08, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I think you said your behavior.--Enerelt (talk) 01:21, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? --Historiographer (talk) 01:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Historiographer, you'd better engage in more discussion instead of edit warring with him since it is just a matter of time that any admin can spot the war, so you guys can be blamed for "tendentious edit warring". And do not get caught into the baiting. You're free to revert or remove any comment on your talk page that you consider uncivil and inappropriate. Responding to such baiting is not worth your time.--Caspian blue 01:27, 18 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Hitoriographer, it is not fruitless that we fight each other. Instead let's create useful articles together about Asian dynastic history. I didn't talk about the direct rule but control of the Mongols. Come on, just gave up our fight. Please.--Enerelt (talk) 01:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * fight? Wikipedia is not battlefield Enerelt. Instead of I request you, Don't stick to your own opinion. Korea was just tributary, not their direct control state.--Historiographer (talk) 01:50, 18 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You are so rude. Can you just accept my offer.Watch out your words. --Enerelt (talk) 01:54, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, You behaved so rude to me. You attack to me at first as "stupid korean".--Historiographer (talk) 01:58, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You started saying Mongolian nationalist. Anyway, I won't change your word indirect rule if it is right or not. I am sorry. Don't keep it at your heart.--Enerelt (talk) 05:13, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Test your World War I knowledge with the Henry Allingham International Contest!
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The October 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

More discussion needed
Historiographer, long time no see. However, you really need to engage in "discussion" instead of edit warring. I understand that due to the language barrier, you are reluctant to leave your message to pertinent talk pages. However, lacks of participation in discussion do not help you, nor improve the articles. Moreover, that avoidance just can give many chances to your opponents. Mongol Empire and Japan-Korea disputes deal with highly controversial subjects within the articles, so use discussion more for your own sake. Regards.--Caspian blue 09:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Discussion needed
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you have made to the page, North South States Period should be reverted as soon as possible, as it appears to be highly unconstructive. I have noticed that you tend to make massive deletions without using the talk pages. Please note that a discussion before a distructive blanking prevents possible edit war, which is not tolerated on Wikipedia. Even though you claim the blanked text is unrelevant to the article, you have never tried to move it to one of the Japanese-related article. Thus it is impossible for anybody to assume your good faith. And please ensure that you provide a proper edit summary. You may also wish to read the WP:DISCUSSION. Thanks.

Jagello (talk) 14:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Late reply
Sorry about that Historiographer. I'm not very familiar with Joseon-era history but I would be willing to help except there is this ridiculous page I need to fix first. Akkies (talk) 02:39, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

RFB
Hi - just a friendly note - on the RFB for Nihonjoe please don't refactor your old comments because it makes it impossible to follow the flow of the conversation. If you need to change a typo (like banned -> blocked) then you can either strike it out and make it clear that you have edited it, or else you should reply at one more indent level below his reply. Please consider reverting your recent changes to make that more readable for other users. Also - if you want to allege other problems like trust or neutrality you may need to cite something specific. 7 08:50, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)
The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:37, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)
The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/Sennen goroshi
Hello, Historiographer. Since you have encountered in many occasions for years and his suspected sock  these days, your input would be appreciated at Sockpuppet investigations/Sennen goroshi. Thanks.--Caspian blue 17:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Fortification issue
(It is banned in Korean Wikipedia, because it is objected to some historian's claim.)

That's why it is called a "theory". Komitsuki (talk) 16:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)
The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Anti-Japanese sentiment and Anti-Japanese sentiment in Korea
Please read the discussion page. I believe you can see why I reverted the edit.

These sentences are made up by one editor. His edit is only his "claim". Not a fact.

For example, it is true that Shoku Nihongi says that Emperor Kammu's mother was of Korean origin. The editor claims that the Japanese "deny" that but they do not. They only question the reliablity of this information because there is no other evidence that support it. It is argued. It is not true that Japan "deny" this information.

Moreover, even if the mother of the Emperor was of Korean origin, it does not mean the Japanese or the Japanese Imperial family are of Korean origin. It only means the family has connection to Korea. The editor mentions "the Japanese denial of their origin/roots", but there is no such a thing as "denial of origin/root".

The editor added several sources saying Japan learned much from Korea. It is true that Japan owes a lot to Korea in ancient times, but it has nothing to do with the article. No decent historians deny the fact that Japan learned much from Korea. The editor arbitraily connects this fact to the article, which is nothing but an original research.

His edit may SEEM to have information sources, but they are irrelevant to the article and the conclusion is made up by the editor, which means it is an original research. I think you can understand me.--Je suis tres fatigue (talk) 09:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!
Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:53, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on South Korea. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 14:02, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


 * So... do you intend to ignore this warning? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 13:42, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war&#32;at South Korea. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.  Sandstein  16:49, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, User:Sennen goroshi raise a problem in many of Korea-related articles first. However, You overlook him, and inversely block to me. Even he chased my edit without any proper reasons, but you should nothing to blocking or warning to him. I don't understand your judge.--Historiographer (talk) 10:10, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

South Korea
You may want to contribute to this discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:South_Korea#use_of_the_word_Takeshima_in_the_article

I was going to change it back myself, but thought it might be polite if I waited for you to get off your block so you had the chance to contribute to the discussion. カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 08:00, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Sennen goroshi's behavior
Historiographer, You should be looking at the Sennen goroshi's wilful vandals in many korea-related articles. Seeing the Sockpuppet investigations/Sennen goroshi/Archive, He was accused by Caspian Blue before. But he stiil do. I hope you should something that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.16.129.194 (talk) 14:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Umm... I don't know about Sockpuppet investigations/Sennen goroshi/Archive. Seemingly, Sennen constantly gain his point long time ago, I'm checking. Thanks.--Historiographer (talk) 13:46, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Kim Gu
You revert me on an edit that stated Koreans called Kim Gu an assassin, robber and traitor. Not someone Japanese. Even it was someone Japanese, a Japanese source is reliable. The source quotes Koreans, and the source is an independent organisation based in NY, USA. Stop your bias, please. カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 07:27, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)
The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:53, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

A request
Hi Historiographer. If you're not busy, would mind producing a collage for the Koreans article? It seems The_Korean_People.jpg collage has been deleted. Regards. Akkies (talk) 08:54, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I also cannot figure out why the file has been deleted. What happened on previous days?--Historiographer (talk) 13:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about it other than it was deleted due to a copyright violation. Akkies (talk) 18:35, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)
The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:29, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:12, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

deceptive edit summary
On the Internet in South Korea article you did more than just change the title - you also removed content. Don't be deceptive with edit summaries please. カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 11:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I just emphasize major edit facts.--Historiographer (talk) 12:49, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Did you think that your removal of cited facts was minor? カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 13:01, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you pick a fight with me now?--Historiographer (talk) 13:14, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

there is an edit warring report concerning your actions - you should take a look and comment if you feel the need.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Historiographer_reported_by_User:Sennen_goroshi_.28Result:_.29

カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 13:48, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello Historiographer. I have been investigating the complaint about you at WP:AN3. The record shows that you've already been blocked five times. If there is no sign from you that you are willing to improve your editing, it is likely that a longer block will be issued. If you would promise at WP:AN3 that you will stop edit warring at Internet in South Korea, you may be able to avoid sanctions. EdJohnston (talk) 19:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Korean nationalism
You left this message in my talk page: Hey, IP. You don't even know me. You shouldn't talk down others editing. Don't recognize negative images to this user.--Historiographer (talk) 11:17, 6 June 2010 (UTC) This is my response: Hey, IP. (Whatever it means) I don't know you indeed and don't even want to know who you are, unless it has someting to do with discussions of my interests. I don't understand what you mean by "others editing" and "this user", and "talking down" and "recognizing negative images" associated with them (whomever they are). Could you specifically explain them? Hkwon (talk) 14:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

A friendly advise: Don't mess with me, as it is to you interests. I have currently plenty of time and willingness to squash anyone who messes with me in Wikipedia. I have done it before and I can do it again. Two articles have been already protected per my request due to your editing war. If you leave me alone, I will leave you alone. Hkwon (talk) 12:16, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not cooperated with you and I'm not leave you alone. Even though you said so, I will accepting your advice. --Historiographer (talk) 13:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's on. I advise you to check often every contribution of yours to Wikipedia from today on, because other editors might check every edit made by you and recklessly rebut your arguments according to WP rules word by word, if you keep that aggressive attitude toward fellow editors. Hkwon (talk) 16:50, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Tsushima Island
I don't care so much if we use "insulted" or "verbally attacked" in the article, I don't want to edit war with you over this, so I'm sure that can be worked out.

What I am worried about is the sources, I am sure the incident did happen, but the first two sources just talk about bad feelings towards Koreans in Japan and the third source was reported as an attack site. Could you find a new source for the incident? If it is in English that would be best.

I have removed the entire section for the moment, as there are no supporting citations, but if someone can find a reliable source than I will not revert anyone who puts the section back in.

We have had enough problems on articles, I imagine we will have problems in the future, but perhaps this is one article we can agree on. カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 14:29, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:06, 6 July 2010 (UTC)